Hello again classmates and teachers. Last week we focused more on the expansion of the United States westward, how the issue of slavery affected those living in the United States, and finally, the civil war. I have already expressed my views on slavery and the expansion of the United States in this blog, but I have not yet had a chance to show how I feel about the civil war. Contrary to a popular opinion, I sympathize with the southern states who left the union. Although I do not agree with the views of these states, I feel that they had a good reason to leave the union. They left because they felt that they had no power in congress and that they were under-represented. The war was not a war over slavery but over power.
Regarding the style in which the civil war was fought, personally, I believe that it was not a good idea. This is because a "gentleman's war" required solders to stand in a line and accept the fire that was given to them, causing heavy casualties on both sides of a battle. This is why larger armies generally had a larger advantage over smaller armies, they could take more losses than the other. This is also why individual battles would have such large numbers of casualties. Combining this with the advanced technology available during the war made the civil war the single most bloody war in American history.
Returning to politics, although I sympathize with the southern states who left the union, I feel that it was not necessary. They could have brought their concerns to congress after they saw how president Lincoln treated the southern states instead of causing a war. I am glad though that the war was fought because it eventually lead to a common sense of unity across the nation. Without this sense of unity, the United States may not have been able to defend itself against external threats such as Japan during World War II or the USSR during the cold war. It would destroy this empire of freedom that we have created and would cause many more people to lose their lives.
I am happy to live in the world I live in now and am glad for every event that lead to it. I hope that we can use what we learn from history to prevent future conflict and pain, and preserve peace.
Sterling, thank you for enunciating your position so clearly! The problem of slavery tends to eclipse the issue of states' rights that threads its way through the political convulsions of the 1840s and 1850s. However, it is hard to separate the phrase "states' rights" from the phrase "to have slaves." Do you feel that this separation is indeed possible?
ReplyDeleteIn response to your question, yes I do feel that the separation of the terms "states' rights" and "to have slaves" can become separate, but over a long period of time. At the particular time addressed in my post, the leaders of the southern states, and many of the people living there, were not ready to make the change, but I feel that over time, if they were pressured enough, they may have willingly let their slaves go. If over a few generations, the idea that slavery was immoral was given to children while they were still impressionable, eventually slavery might have collapsed. This also could have been helped along if northern businesses started to refuse products produced with slave labor, as it would have made slavery less profitable. Unfortunately, the Union was not able to hold itself together long enough for this to occur.
Delete